Right. But not the point. See below.
That's true. But, again, not the point. Of the group of people who do buy a 3PP supplement, what percentage would you say also own the product that supplement is based on?
This is unimportant, because ECMO3 wasn't talking about people who buy the 3pp supplements--they were specifically talking about people who buy, or don't buy, the
WotC products. In fact, they have specifically said that me choosing to not buy the WotC product for any reason
other than a boycott wouldn't be harmful to 3pp creators. I didn't buy the WotC book because I can't afford it? Because I don't like the setting? Because I'm leery of the book being bad? Because I don't need a new adventure? No harm, no foul. I didn't buy the WotC book because because I don't want to buy from WotC? Those poor 3pp creators will be starving in the streets because of me.
If ECMO3
had been talking about people who buy the 3pp supplements, then they would have been perfectly happy with people buying non-WotC 3pp D&D material, since at the end of the day, it's still 3pp creators getting the money. Instead, they are specifically upset with those of us who are not buying from WotC.
With you here.
No!
That is not the other premise. You are quite off topic here. Harming all creators?
That's what ECMO3 said. You might want to address what they're saying before trying to claim what I'm saying is wrong.
The single, narrow point I was backing the OP on (and I think the single, narrow point that you and the OP having been going back and forth on) is specifically the case where a consumer, who under normal circumstances would have bought a WotC product, now decides to boycott that product. What the OP is saying on this narrow point (that same point you both have been going back and forth on), is that this circumstance harms the 3PP whose product is a supplement to the WotC product because even though not all (yes, no guarantee, of course there isn't) but statistically most of that product's sales will be from an owner of that particular WotC product.
And that's the problem, because you aren't seeing what's going on when you're focusing on a "single, narrow point."
Because ECMO3 is insisting that even though I would never, under normal circumstances, have bought a 3pp tied to a WotC book, I am harming those 3pp creators by not buying the WotC books. Because "a high tide raises all boats." Because the trickle-down effect--which they even
admitted they believed would occur.
It seems that
@mamba understands what the OP and I are saying. They understood, and gave a lovely response. If you go back and read the post that mamba is responding to, you'll see that one part of this response of theirs is wrong:
You are someone who is disagreeing with that!
THIS IS LITERALLY WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING THIS WHOLE TIME.
What the blankety-blank did you
think I was saying? That I wasn't buying
any gaming books? Were you simply not
reading any of my posts?
